In 2021, a group of people slowly froze to death in icy waters, and despite knowing about them, no-one came to help. 27 bodies later were found (4 are still missing – the deceased included a pregnant woman and three children). Yet both British and French authorities knew of the boat, with transcripts proving that one passenger had begged for help, with retorts back that they were in ‘the wrong waters’. When the boat overturned at 3am, it was only a French fisherman who raised the alarm.
British Red Cross has a good article on the stories behind the tabloid headlines (most of which aren’t true). Obviously this is a serious issue, but publishing misleading articles in newspapers is not the way to solve things.
The big argument often used by many right-wing journalists is why (when France can keep refugees safe too) do refugees always come to England? The answer is obvious: because often they have family here, nobody is going to risk life and limb going on a boat, if they have the chance to stay in France, which is a nice country to live in.
It’s because often after years of separation due to becoming refugees, they wish to be reunited with their loved ones, just as you would:
If you think about where you might go if your home was being bombed or your life was at risk because of persecution, it would probably be somewhere where you know someone. We would all want to be able to hug and hold our family again, after experiencing such horrors. British Red Cross
Other reasons include language (it’s more common for refugees to know English so there is more chance of finding work and accommodation). And the little-known fact that the media often leave out is that it’s not the decision of the refugees where they go. They are often leaving in fear and secrecy, and are at the mercy of smugglers who decide where they are going. The lack of an official legal route for asylum seekers to the UK (which is what campaigners want) means they are left in limbo, rather than coming legally to fight their case (they would then be deported if there was no case, but could come here safely without drowning off boats if they had a case).
The other reason that migrants often travel to England is one that many MPs would not like to talk about: the fact that employment is tightly regulated in France, so it’s more difficult to find work as unlike England, it’s not easy to find work as a poorly-paid and badly-treated employee of some shady outfit. Migrants are often desperate to work and will ‘do the jobs that nobody else will here’ like working in abattoirs (that would give most people constant nightmares’).
It’s interesting that despite all the anti-migrant rhetoric, during the pandemic when we had no immigrants to pick our food, the government was encouraging people to get involved on farms. They didn’t realise that picking crops for farms is actually a skilled job, and most of us are not able to do it. MPs were looking at empty plates, and wondering why!
why the Rwandan Bill was dangerous
If people risk their lives to travel on small boats to reach safety (often after awful times), then telling them they will end up in Rwanda is not going to deter. In fact, many have fled regimes with poor human rights abuses, and many commercial airlines don’t want to get involved in sending chained screaming refugees back to near where they escaped, meaning the planes will be military. Experts have warned that airlines that do comply could become complicit in violating human rights and court orders.
MPs said that Rwanda is a safe country, despite previous records of human rights abuses. The Global Peace Index (which unsurprisingly has Switzerland has top) lists Rwanda as no.88 (it’s genocide only ended in 1994, which also killed the country’s lions).
Although not illegal, this very religious country does not let any mention of people being gay in the media, with some people reporting being blackmailed or harassed. And Human Rights Watch still has grave concerns over the treatment of homeless people, beggars, street children, street vendors and sex workers (prostitutes). So what on earth will life be like for a homeless gay refugee who arrives here?
What Do the Experts Say is the Solution?
What is always strange is that MPs tend to say what the solutions could be (mostly they aren’t) without actually asking the experts who know what they are talking about. Recently, Sir Keir Starmer travelled to Italy to ask the Prime Minister (who has said she thought Mussolini was good?) for advice. So here’s a summary of what the real experts (from peace envoys to those working with refugees to people at the frontline trying to stop the boats) say:
Create world peace. This is the obvious one. The answer is to stop the horrors that people are escaping from. But while (mostly) western countries keep sending arms to countries that then end up with people living in ‘hell on earth’, of course they are going to try to escape. If you and your family were living on animal feed (or dragging children whose limbs had been blown off), you could try to get out, wouldn’t you? So would they.
Refugee Settlement. This does not mean waiting until people have risked their lives to arrive in England, then shipping them off to Rwanda. It means using an ordered airlift program (like Operation Pitting which helped Afghanistan refugees) and taking them to a pre-destined place where they are safe.
Here’s the biggie: At present asylum seekers register their claims in the UK on arrival. But as UK border officials already have a base in France, having this processed there would determine the genuine asylum seekers. Not only would this enable them to travel safely (or stay in France), but it would (very importantly) ‘stop the gangs’ as there would be no refugees to exploit.
Make UK employment laws stricter. One big reason why gangs bring migrants to England, is because they can take very low-paying jobs like at nail bars and car wash stations, being paid a pittance. This could not happen in France, as the employers would go to prison. Before ‘throwing stones’ at others, UK MPs would be good to look at why gangs think they can make money by sending vulnerable people here, to be paid peanuts.
The tragic incident a few years back when Vietnamese people froze to the death in an Essex lorry, was full of people who were hoping to work here, likely for below the minimum wage. The 31 males and 8 females (including 2 15-year old boys) were all believed to be victims of human trafficking.
Most refugees are 100% genuine
Refugee Council has some interesting stats from 2022, which is likely similar now. Around 20% of the people crossing the channel are children, and if they all had been processed at asylum centres, 60% would have been classed as refugees (at risk if returning home).
40% of them came from just 5 countries (Iran, Syria, Eritrea, Sudan and Afghanistan – known as officially the most dangerous country on earth). The last 3 countries had an asylum ranking of 98%, meaning nearly all were genuinely fleeing for their lives.
Asylum seekers don’t come here for benefits
Think asylum seekers come here to claim benefits. Most are not sitting at home watching satellite TVs and surfing their phones. Genuine asylum seekers come here to stay alive, and many can’t even afford food, and know nothing of our benefits system, when they arrive.
They don’t have access to any media, how would they know this? All they know is that they have heard that people in England are fair and kind. Until they are able to legally work, most asylum workers live on less than £10 a day.
Did you know that it takes around £200,000 to £250,000 to train a new doctor. Yet the UK has around 12000 medically-qualified refugees on the British Medical Association database (taking around £25,000 to support each one to practice).
